Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 103: A New Guide to Chassis and Suspension Types

Confessions of an Automationeer, Part 103: A New Guide to Chassis, Engine Placement, and Suspension Types

Having already explained the various body and chassis materials used in Automation, I shall now elaborate on the chassis, engine placement and suspension types available in the game. Considering that the fan-made guide on the Automation forums was abandoned long ago, I felt that I would like to pick up right from where it left off. To start off with, here is a list of chassis types as of the most recent build (LCV 4.1.17).

List of Chassis Types in Automation

• Ladder: This consists of a rectangular frame shaped like a ladder, to which the bodywork is attached. It is the cheapest option by far; however, it provides less safety and rigidity than any other type, and is also the heaviest option available. Moreover, it cannot be made of anything other than steel. Nevertheless, its oversized nature makes it durable and well-suited to off-road applications.
• Monocoque: Utilizing a superstructure shaped like the car it is built on, and to which the panels are attached, this is the most commonly used chassis for modern cars. Although it requires a larger factory and is more complex, expensive and difficult to develop than an equivalent ladder frame, it is lighter, stiffer and safer than any other chassis type, and is compatible with any material. In fact, this is the only kind of chassis that can be made out of carbon fiber, albeit at immense cost.
• Space frame: Consisting of a network of tubes that vaguely resembles the car's shape, it is lighter and stiffer than a ladder frame, though not to the same extent as a monocoque. It also requires a smaller factory, although it is more expensive to build and develop, and must be made of either regular or galvanized steel. As such, it is commonly found on low-volume sports cars, especially in the earlier years.
• Semi-space frame: A novel kind of chassis which combines a unitary passenger compartment with front and rear space frames. It is easier to build than a pure monocoque, though not as light or rigid. It can only be made from aluminum and is not available until 2001, effectively limiting its use to high-end modern cars.
• Light truck monocoque: Combining a unitary passenger compartment with a ladder frame for the cargo area, this is a compromise between the durability of a ladder frame and the superior safety and lightness of a true monocoque. This makes it well-suited to light-duty trucks.

Next is a list of engine placement options.

• Front transverse: This places the engine ahead of the passenger compartment and perpendicular to the longitudinal axis. It is a space-efficient configuration that is compatible with front- or all-wheel-drive (unless using a torsion beam rear suspension - see below) and is therefore suited to many mass-market cars, especially smaller, low-budget ones. However, it is less ideal for accommodating longer engines, especially straight-sixes.
• Front longitudinal: Unlike the front-transverse placement above, this places the engine ahead of the passenger compartment and parallel to the longitudinal axis. It is compatible with rear-, all-, and in some cases, front-wheel-drive, as well as 4x4. However, it is less space-efficient than a transverse set-up, and is therefore better suited to larger cars, especially executive, sports and luxury cars.
• Mid transverse: The first of two mid-engined configurations, this places the engine between the passenger compartment and ahead of the rear wheels, and parallel to the axles. It is ideal for small and light sports cars which do not need a large engine bay, but is not compatible with AWD in Automation.
• Mid longitudinal: The second of two mid-engined configurations, this differs from the mid transverse set-up in that the engine is placed perpendicular to the axles. It is a common arrangement for high-performance sports cars, supercars and hypercars, especially since it is compatible with AWD. Both mid-engined configurations place more weight over the rear axle than any front-engined configuration, and should be set up accordingly.
• Rear longitudinal: A rear-engined set-up places the engine over the rear axle. While it is a viable arrangement in the earlier years for smaller cars, it places even more weight over the rear wheels than any other configuration, aiding traction but also compromising drivability due to the effects of weight transfer.

Last but not least, here is the list of suspension types available in the game. Unless otherwise stated, all of these options are available only for rear suspension.

• Solid axle (leaf-sprung): This relies on a pair of bow-shaped metal springs attached to each end of the car at one end of the spring, and to a solid bar or a differential. It is cheap, simple and capable of supporting heavy loads, as well as being very robust off-road, and can be fitted to front and/or rear axles. However, its weight and dependent nature compromise the car's ride and handling.
• Solid axle (coil-sprung): As above, but with coils for springs, and uses a set of links between the axle and chassis, thereby providing better comfort and handling compared to a leaf-sprung solid axle. It, too, can be fitted to front and/or rear axles.
• Torsion beam: Unlike other suspension types, a torsion beam is semi-independent and can only be fitted to the rear axle of a front-wheel-drive car. It consists of a set of rear-facing trailing arms supporting the rear wheels, and are linked together laterally by a hollow metal beam. It provides decent levels of comfort and handling when tuned correctly, and takes up little space, as well as being cheaper to build compared to a fully independent rear end. However, it cannot be combined with a driven rear axle, and as such is not recommended for larger, more upmarket cars.
• Semi-trailing arm: This is the simplest type of independent rear suspension. Comprised of two rear-facing Y-shaped trailing arms attached to the rear axle via a vertical spring/damper combination, it is heavier and less capable of supporting heavy loads than a torsion beam setup, but provides slightly better comfort and handling, although it is not as good in this regard than a more advanced setup. Therefore, it is well-suited to low-budget applications for which handling is a priority, especially in the early years.
• MacPherson strut: Uniquely among suspension types, a MacPherson Strut can only be used on a front axle (except on some mid-engined bodies where it can be used for rear suspension) as long as the bonnet (hood) line is high enough to accommodate it, and cannot be fitted to a ladder frame chassis. It has one lower control arm, attached via a pivot under the wheel hub at the outer end, and bushings near the bottom of the chassis at the inner end. It takes part of its name from the strut attached to a reinforced wheel arch section, which is called a strut tower. It takes up less space and costs less to manufacture than a double-wishbone front suspension (see below) but does not provide as much ride comfort or handling precision, and as such is a good choice for most mass-market vehicles, especially low-budget ones.
• Double wishbone: One of the few suspension types that can be fitted to front and/or rear axles. It consists of a pair of A-shaped pivoting arms called wishbones, linking the top and bottom of the wheel hub to pivot points on the chassis. With its ability to provide superior wheel alignment compared to less sophisticated designs, it is most commonly used in high-performance, racing, and luxury car applications, where its greater cost and complexity are considered acceptable trade-offs for its dynamic advantages.
• Multi-link: This is a highly advanced design that utilizes several (usually at least five) pivoting arms called links to ensure precise rear wheel movement. This provides even better ride and handling potential than a double wishbone set-up, but at the expense of even higher cost and complexity, making it ideal for premium cars where its dynamic benefits are considered desirable. In addition, it only becomes available from 1990 onwards.
• Pushrod: This is the most advanced, complex and expensive suspension type available in Automation. It is similar to the double wishbone design in principle, but mounts the spring/damper unit horizontally instead of vertically, and connects it to the lower wishbone using a pushrod and rocker arm assembly. This mounts the spring and damper inboard, reducing unsprung mass and improving aerodynamics and weight distribution, with unmatched potential for fine-tuning. Being based on a double wishbone design, it can be fitted to the front suspension of mid-engined cars. However, its extreme complexity generally precludes its use in all but the most expensive supercars and race cars, and as with the multi-link setup above, it is not unlocked until 1990.

This concludes the second part of my guide to the chassis options in Automation.